in his first season as a starter, stockton is top 4 in the league in field goal percentage (the fact he was fourth in the entire league is astounding as a point guard), top 2 in steals per game, led the nba in assists per game by almost 2 assists (and recorded the second highest assists per game average in nba history), was his teams best player in the regular season, and he also stepped up huge in the playoffs.

the jazz demolished the heavily favoured portland trail blazers in the first round, before succumbing to the eventual champion lakers in the conference semi finals in 7 games.

stockton's averages in the playoffs you ask? only 19.8ppg, 4.1rpg, 14.8apg, 3.4spg, all on 51%fg, including 29 points, 20 assists, and 5 steals in the game 7 loss to the lakers.

thomas was the piston's best player in the regular season, and out of every player who participated in the playoffs, he stepped up the most.

after a tough first round against the malone's of washington, the pistons destroyed the best player in the nba and his chicago bulls in 5 games. before bullying the defending eastern conference champion boston celtics to take that series in 6, winning 2 games on the road in the process.
they then came within 3 points off pulling off one of the biggest upsets in nba history, losing game 7 to the 62 win laker outfit away from home.

fat was the nuggets best player in the regular season, and the playoffs. he was also named to the all defensive second team and was one of the best all-round players in the league. if it wasn't for him missing some playoff games they probably would have taken dallas out, and made the conference finals.

worthy was the lakers third best player in the regular season, but because his superb playoffs he was regarded as their second best by the end of the playoffs, and he stepped up just as much as magic johnson. and he stepped up huge when it mattered most. in 3 game 7 wins by the lakers in the postseason, worthy averaged 29ppg, 9.7rpg, 6.3apg, and 2.3spg.

Correct on Jordan and Magic, the top 2 in that order. Nobody would argue against those 2 in their prime. Hakeem was close, I have him just behind at 4th, but had to think about it, so no big argument here.

Ewing? No, he might be top 5, but he wasn't better than Barkley yet.

I can't see a case for any of those players mentioned other than the Michael and Magic who were better, and Olajuwon who you could make a case for.

no case can be made for barkley over any players here.

Quote:

Correct about Jordasn, Magic and Ewing in that order, but no more. Hakeem and Robinson were relatively close. The others weren't even debatable. I can't see a case for any of them.

no case can be made for barkley over any players here.

Quote:

Barkley did have individual success. 23/11/4 on 55% shooting. How many can do that? Despite a lazy season, Barkley's talent still put him above enough players to comfortably make the top 10.

You're literally putting Barkley below quite a few players, I've never once heard anyone claim were as good as Barkley, much less better.

what is 23/11/4 if you aren't making the playoffs. nice kevin love season here from barkley.

Quote:

Nah, I'm as big of a Pippen fan as anyone, and his playoff run was excellent, but he was a tier below the guys like Jordan, Magic, Barkley, Robinson, Malone, Ewing and probably still Olajuwon despite the 26 missed games. And even a guy like Drexler who had similar weaknesses to Pippen still seemed to be the better player, and was widely regarded as such.

no case can be made for anyone over pippen that year besides jordan.

Quote:

I'm really having trouble seeing how you end up putting Stockton in the class of the top 5 players, when he was very good at what he did, but didn't have the dominance to be put in that group, and certainly not to compete with Magic. Stockton wasn't even the MVP of his own team(though he was closer to Malone from '88-'91 than he was after).

not sure where you are getting this from. stockton was easily the best and most valuable player on his team, he was also top 3 most valuabe player in '88.

Quote:

Drexler's value on a basketball court wasn't comparable. And Pippen couldn't impact a game like Magic either, and case for MVP is clearly worse considering he was on the same team as the MVP and the best player ever who was arguably at his peak.

there is alot of individual sacrifice you have to make as a second best player on a championship team, or a team with the best record in the nba. so with this in mind pippen was ranked correctly.

Quote:

Barkley was a much better offensive player. He was almost impossible to deal with when he had his back to the basket which is why he was probably getting doubled and receiving more defensive attention than anyone in the league. And he was a better passer, particularly at that point. Robinson became one of the league's best passing centers around '93-'96, and also improved his jump shot around then.

where is the results of being a MUCH better offensive player? there is no results, barkley lost time and time again due to his selfishness and bone headed decisions.

Quote:

Regardless of Barkley having better numbers

Quote:

he was simply the better offensive player at that end

destroyed

Quote:

while Robinson never achieved offensive dominance. This was because he never had a go to move with his back to the basket, didn't really have the right build for being a post player, lacked good footwork and just seemed awkward and uncomfortable backing his man down. This is why his scoring average usually dropped dramatically despite scoring a lot in the regular season due to his unmatched ability to run the floor, being a perfect target for alley oops, being too quick for opposing centers to deal with when he faced up(though he always attacked the basket less in the postseason) and later, adding a decent jump shot. But Robinson was a dominant defensive player and a good to very good offensive player. Barkley was a dominant offensive player.

lol at this offensive dominance. barkley never achieved any dominance ever. except for 1 or 2 good seasons his career was a disappointment. it was a pity he never had any work ethic at all, because after 1986 where barkley proved himself to be one of the best 5 players in the nba after only 2 years in the nba, his career fizzled..its just sad he couldn't keep that momentum going or else he might have been considered among the all time greats.

appreciate Stockton's game, he did the job of a pure PG extremely well, but I also want my point guard to step up and carry a team when necessary. Stockton just wasn't comfortable doing that. And that's why he was never a first tier, top 5 player and MVP candidate. Even a guy like Jason Kidd who wasn't the most talented scorer, would step up, assert himself and carry a team when he had to.

when did he not carry the team? he was a top 5 player a number of years, and also top mvp candidate a number of years, including top 3 in '88.

Quote:

I don't think KJ benefited from the Suns pace anymore than Stockton benefited from Sloan's system and having a team who fit perfect with him in Malone.

stockton would have definately benefited from playing at a high pace team, with a number of potential 20 ppg scorers rather than 1.

Quote:

Besides, I'm not basing my selection of KJ over Stockton primarily on numbers. KJ's explosiveness and duel threat of taking over a game with scoring or setting up his teammates as well as his superior playoff run is why I chose KJ. It's not a big gap for me, but I'm confident in choosing KJ that year.

fair enough. despite kj's better playoff, i'd still take stockton due to the gap being massive in the regular season.

Quote:

And only one team had the talent Portland had.

they had all of the key players "talent" there 2 years earlier and they finished below .500

Quote:

I'm not going to deny that Malone's durability is an advantage, but he wasn't better out on the basketball court, and Barkley's injuries exposed his cast as limited.

actually he was easily better out on the basketball court

Quote:

Absolutely not.

Quote:

That's just laughable, all one has to do is watch a few games from both players that year to see Barkley's superiority offensively. Not even a peak '98 Karl Malone can compete with prime '88-'93 Barkley offensively.

i've watched more than a few games.

Quote:

Dumars was also clearly the better passer and playmaker. Hawkins has the edge as a scorer, but I don't think the gap is that big.

dumars was nice, but hawkins stepped up more than barkley and was huge. really can't imagine dumars having games like 26/10/6/6, 30/5/7 etc.

in his first season as a starter, stockton is top 4 in the league in field goal percentage (the fact he was fourth in the entire league is astounding as a point guard), top 2 in steals per game, led the nba in assists per game by almost 2 assists (and recorded the second highest assists per game average in nba history), was his teams best player in the regular season, and he also stepped up huge in the playoffs.

the jazz demolished the heavily favoured portland trail blazers in the first round, before succumbing to the eventual champion lakers in the conference semi finals in 7 games.

stockton's averages in the playoffs you ask? only 19.8ppg, 4.1rpg, 14.8apg, 3.4spg, all on 51%fg, including 29 points, 20 assists, and 5 steals in the game 7 loss to the lakers.

Utah played at the 6th fastest pace in '88, and we saw many point guards throughout the 80's put up video game assist numbers becasuse of all the easy baskets in transition.

Stockton also had the power forward who ran the floor better than anyone at his position, and finished as well as anyone, which certainly didn't hurt his assist numbers on a running team.

And as far as team success, well there was Karl Malone of course, but equally important is that Utah was the best defensive team in the league, but only the 16th best offensive team out of 23 teams. So how much of Utah's team success can be attributed to Stockton? Some certainly, but he wasn't carrying this team, he was a fine defensive point guard, but he wasn't anchoring that defense, Mark Eaton was.

In fact, Barkley's Sixers were a much better offensive team than Utah.

thomas was the piston's best player in the regular season, and out of every player who participated in the playoffs, he stepped up the most.

after a tough first round against the malone's of washington, the pistons destroyed the best player in the nba and his chicago bulls in 5 games. before bullying the defending eastern conference champion boston celtics to take that series in 6, winning 2 games on the road in the process.
they then came within 3 points off pulling off one of the biggest upsets in nba history, losing game 7 to the 62 win laker outfit away from home.

thomas's averages in the playoffs: 21.9ppg, 4.7rpg, 8.7apg, 2.9spg

Isiah was too streaky to be compared with Barkley. He shot 46.3% in the regular season and 43.7% in the playoffs. Barkley as you know shot 58.7%.

And how much of Detroit's success was due to their top 2 defense and the fact that they outrebounded opponents by 3 rpg?

fat was the nuggets best player in the regular season, and the playoffs. he was also named to the all defensive second team and was one of the best all-round players in the league. if it wasn't for him missing some playoff games they probably would have taken dallas out, and made the conference finals.

lever's averages in the playoffs: 17.0ppg, 9.3rpg, 7.0apg, 1.9spg

Fat was also not an elite player. The numbers had a lot to do with Denver's unbelievable pace when they played for Doug Moe, and the rebounding was not only helped by the pace, but also the fact that Denver was a pathetic rebounding team.

I wouldn't say that a guy who averaged 18.9 ppg and 7.8 apg on 47.3% shooting on a team with the fastest pace has any case over a legend who was approaching or entering his prime.

Lever didn't have any devastating moves, he didn't seem like an elite shooter, and he didn't seem to stand out as one of the best passers in the league.

worthy was the lakers third best player in the regular season, but because his superb playoffs he was regarded as their second best by the end of the playoffs, and he stepped up just as much as magic johnson. and he stepped up huge when it mattered most. in 3 game 7 wins by the lakers in the postseason, worthy averaged 29ppg, 9.7rpg, 6.3apg, and 2.3spg.

Worthy was the Lakers second best player in both the regular season and playoffs. He always did step up big in the playoffs, hence the nickname "Big Game James", but being fortunate enough to play on a stacked team with a top 10 player of all time in his prime, who got him a lot of easy baskets doesn't make him a better player than Barkley.

Quote:

what is 23/11/4 if you aren't making the playoffs. nice kevin love season here from barkley.

Even when Barkley wasn't motivated like in '92, he was much better than Love could dream of being. Love isn't elite at getting his own shot, and doesn't have to be doubled constantly like Barkley, Love doesn't shoot 55%, and Love is an even worse defender than Barkley. Plus, Love hasn't even won 35 games.

What happened to the Sixers after Barkley left? They had the same players plus an excellent addition Jeff Hornacek and a solid rookie Clarence Weatherspoon, but they dropped to 26-56.

I can drop Barkley due to him being unmotivated and causing problems with trade demands and trashing teammates, but there's a limit. He's obviously behind Jordan, Ewing, Malone, Robinson, Hakeem and you could argue that dropped below Pippen.

Quote:

there is alot of individual sacrifice you have to make as a second best player on a championship team, or a team with the best record in the nba. so with this in mind pippen was ranked correctly.

Pippen didn't sacrifice all that much, when he improved and entered his prime, he was capable of putting up similar numbers when he was winning titles in '92, '96 and '97 as he was when Jordan was gone in '94 and '95.

Quote:

where is the results of being a MUCH better offensive player? there is no results, barkley lost time and time again due to his selfishness and bone headed decisions.

Barkley got to the finals as the best player on his team, something Robinson never did.

Quote:

lol at this offensive dominance. barkley never achieved any dominance ever. except for 1 or 2 good seasons his career was a disappointment. it was a pity he never had any work ethic at all, because after 1986 where barkley proved himself to be one of the best 5 players in the nba after only 2 years in the nba, his career fizzled..its just sad he couldn't keep that momentum going or else he might have been considered among the all time greats.

Barkley wasn't one of the top 5 players in '86, and he did get significantly better after that, he was raw in '86 compared to his prime. He was at his best from '88-'93. And Barkley is considered one of the all time greats.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shep

when did he not carry the team? he was a top 5 player a number of years, and also top mvp candidate a number of years, including top 3 in '88.

Stockton almost never carried the team. He was either too reluctant to take over a game or incapable. He had just 11 games in the regular season where he scored 30 or more points, and never more than 34. And in the playoffs he had just two, 34 points and 30 points. And not surprisingly, they were both vs Nelson's Warriors in losses.

Quote:

stockton would have definately benefited from playing at a high pace team, with a number of potential 20 ppg scorers rather than 1.

I can't see Stockton being in a better situation for his game and mentality.

Quote:

fair enough. despite kj's better playoff, i'd still take stockton due to the gap being massive in the regular season.

I don't think the regular season gap is massive, but I don't have a problem with anyone taking Stockton. That's why I said I don't think the gap is big.

Quote:

they had all of the key players "talent" there 2 years earlier and they finished below .500

Which just says that they underachieved.

Quote:

dumars was nice, but hawkins stepped up more than barkley and was huge. really can't imagine dumars having games like 26/10/6/6, 30/5/7 etc.

Malone was in the best shape of the NBA. Go to google and look at his conditioning. 1 hour on the stairmaster at a level 12, stadium stairs, sprints, 1 hour of weights, then 1 hour hair more of the stairmaster.

Some days he would do 6 hours of labor in his barn. The guy was a freak. Very ripped.

Utah played at the 6th fastest pace in '88, and we saw many point guards throughout the 80's put up video game assist numbers becasuse of all the easy baskets in transition.

i actually have the jazz ranked 8th in terms of fastest pace, and pace adjustment is taken into consideration when ranking players, but i did not see anyone in the 80's rack up 13.8 assists per game besides one john stockton, and isiah thomas (thomas did it when his team had a top 2 pace).

Quote:

Stockton also had the power forward who ran the floor better than anyone at his position, and finished as well as anyone, which certainly didn't hurt his assist numbers on a running team.

to get assists you need players who can put the ball in the basket, this is elementary.

Quote:

And as far as team success, well there was Karl Malone of course, but equally important is that Utah was the best defensive team in the league, but only the 16th best offensive team out of 23 teams. So how much of Utah's team success can be attributed to Stockton? Some certainly, but he wasn't carrying this team, he was a fine defensive point guard, but he wasn't anchoring that defense, Mark Eaton was.

stockton was accounting for 43.7 of the jazz 108.5 points in the regular season or 40% of the teams offense in the regular season, and then 51.2 of the jazz 103.4 points in the playoffs or 49% of the teams offense in the regular season.
no sure about this offensive rating and defensive rating bs, but i know the jazz shot the ball at a higher clip than any team not named celtics, lakers, or pistons.

Quote:

In fact, Barkley's Sixers were a much better offensive team than Utah.

offensive rating bs. the sixers shot the 8th worst field goal percentage in the entire league. in any case, what is the point of being ranked among the top in offensive rating if you couldn't break 40 wins and sniff the playoffs? i'm sure they will say at the end of the season, hey who cares about the playoffs? we were ranked high in offensive rating..and thats all that matters

nice numbers by karles lovely there, but did he make the playoffs?

Quote:

Isiah was too streaky to be compared with Barkley. He shot 46.3% in the regular season and 43.7% in the playoffs. Barkley as you know shot 58.7%.

thats ok, i'd take 46% and 44%fg and a game 7 of the nba finals appearance over 59% and not participating in the playoffs due to winning only 36 games.

Quote:

And how much of Detroit's success was due to their top 2 defense and the fact that they outrebounded opponents by 3 rpg?

isiah thomas was that teams best player by a country mile. as you will know the teams best player will get alot of the praise that comes with winning, as well as a teams best player will get alot of the flak that comes with losing..and rightfully so. as nice it is to have defense and rebounding, that roster will be lucky if it scraped into the playoffs with no isiah thomas.

they definately had depth. depth that would be swept in the first round if they were lucky if thomas hadn't been there.

Quote:

I'm not sure why beating Chicago is that significant. They did not have much surrounding Jordan.

the pistons only won 4 more games during the regular season. beating the worlds greatest player isn't significant? the pistons made jordan seem human, a feat that no other team could achieve. meanwhile thomas averaged 20.4ppg, 4rpg, 10.4apg, and 2 steals and was the best and most valuable player of the series. the pistons average winning margin was 15 in the 4-1 demolition job.

Quote:

Detroit beat Boston because they didn't have a bench and Bird shot 35%.

the celtics had the best record in the east with 57 wins, and were coming off a finals appearance. thomas averaged 23ppg, 5.2rpg, 8.3apg, and 2.7spg as was the best and most valuable player of the series.

Quote:

Fat was also not an elite player. The numbers had a lot to do with Denver's unbelievable pace when they played for Doug Moe, and the rebounding was not only helped by the pace, but also the fact that Denver was a pathetic rebounding team.

fat was the best player on a team with the second best record in the west. denver did lead the league and pace and this was considered, but his play just could not go without recognition. denver's playoff record proves how much he meant to the team
without fat: 0-4 (the 4 games were lost by an average of 12 points)
with fat: 5-2
in the conference semifinals: nuggets up 2-1 before he went down, then proceded to lose the next 3 games

Quote:

I wouldn't say that a guy who averaged 18.9 ppg and 7.8 apg on 47.3% shooting on a team with the fastest pace has any case over a legend who was approaching or entering his prime.

if one of them won 54 games and played well in the playoffs and the other one only won thirty something i would definately say the loser has no case. winning games matters to me afterall.

Quote:

Lever didn't have any devastating moves, he didn't seem like an elite shooter, and he didn't seem to stand out as one of the best passers in the league.

yet he was his teams best player in the regular season and playoffs, and they won 54 games in the regular season, and had a 5-2 record with him in the playoffs

Quote:

Worthy was the Lakers second best player in both the regular season and playoffs

he was third after the regular season and second after the playoffs

Quote:

He always did step up big in the playoffs, hence the nickname "Big Game James"

lol thanks for the info

Quote:

but being fortunate enough to play on a stacked team with a top 10 player of all time in his prime, who got him a lot of easy baskets doesn't make him a better player than Barkley.

james worthy won finals mvp over that same top 10 player of all time, which alone makes him a better player than lovely.

Quote:

Even when Barkley wasn't motivated like in '92, he was much better than Love could dream of being. Love isn't elite at getting his own shot, and doesn't have to be doubled constantly like Barkley, Love doesn't shoot 55%, and Love is an even worse defender than Barkley. Plus, Love hasn't even won 35 games.

love was ranked 17 this year and barkley was ranked 16 in 1992.

Quote:

What happened to the Sixers after Barkley left? They had the same players plus an excellent addition Jeff Hornacek and a solid rookie Clarence Weatherspoon, but they dropped to 26-56.

well jeff hornacek wasn't as good as charles barkley, i'll give you that... they just wanted to get rid of him at any cost, thats how much they hated him, so they took hornacek (who was gone a year later). but key contributers armon gilliam and johnny dawkins also had large drop offs in production. gilliam went from 17/8/2 to 12/6/2 and dawkins went from 12/3/7 to 9/2/5. with the team tanking they still manage to only win 9 less games than they did the previous year.

Quote:

I can drop Barkley due to him being unmotivated and causing problems with trade demands and trashing teammates, but there's a limit. He's obviously behind Jordan, Ewing, Malone, Robinson, Hakeem and you could argue that dropped below Pippen.

Pippen didn't sacrifice all that much, when he improved and entered his prime, he was capable of putting up similar numbers when he was winning titles in '92, '96 and '97 as he was when Jordan was gone in '94 and '95.

pippen was in his peak in 1991, better than any other year. who knows what kind of numbers he would've put up given a situation where he was the best player.

Quote:

Barkley got to the finals as the best player on his team, something Robinson never did.

so 1 year is the result of being a much better offensive player?

Quote:

Barkley wasn't one of the top 5 players in '86, and he did get significantly better after that, he was raw in '86 compared to his prime. He was at his best from '88-'93. And Barkley is considered one of the all time greats.

if you consider top 35 in the all-time greats. and barkley's '86 was his second best season in the league.

Quote:

Stockton almost never carried the team. He was either too reluctant to take over a game or incapable. He had just 11 games in the regular season where he scored 30 or more points, and never more than 34. And in the playoffs he had just two, 34 points and 30 points. And not surprisingly, they were both vs Nelson's Warriors in losses.

who cares how many times he scored 30 points? that wasn't his role in the offense to take the most shots and score the most points. how many times did ben wallace score 30 points? oh he never did? must mean he was trash.

Quote:

I can't see Stockton being in a better situation for his game and mentality.

we will never know

Quote:

I don't think the regular season gap is massive, but I don't have a problem with anyone taking Stockton. That's why I said I don't think the gap is big.

i actually have the jazz ranked 8th in terms of fastest pace, and pace adjustment is taken into consideration when ranking players, but i did not see anyone in the 80's rack up 13.8 assists per game besides one john stockton, and isiah thomas (thomas did it when his team had a top 2 pace).

I'm not saying that what Stockton did was easy, just that the pace helped those numbers.

Quote:

stockton was accounting for 43.7 of the jazz 108.5 points in the regular season or 40% of the teams offense in the regular season, and then 51.2 of the jazz 103.4 points in the playoffs or 49% of the teams offense in the regular season.
no sure about this offensive rating and defensive rating bs, but i know the jazz shot the ball at a higher clip than any team not named celtics, lakers, or pistons.

The reason their offensive wasn't as effective as their FG% suggests is because they were average/mediocre in 3s and free throws, and only 3 teams turned the ball over more often.

Quote:

offensive rating bs. the sixers shot the 8th worst field goal percentage in the entire league. in any case, what is the point of being ranked among the top in offensive rating if you couldn't break 40 wins and sniff the playoffs? i'm sure they will say at the end of the season, hey who cares about the playoffs? we were ranked high in offensive rating..and thats all that matters

FG% doesn't factor in turnovers, 3s and free throws which are all relevant in putting up points. They made more free throws than any other team, were 7th in 3 pointers made, and while they were also a high turnover team, they didn't turn the ball over as much as Utah.

Charles needed a team to make the playoffs, both Charles and Stockton impacted the game primarily at the offensive end, and Charles was on the better offensive team. The Sixers missed the playoffs because of defense, and while Barkley can make your interior defense weaker, I don't see them having that problem if they have Mark Eaton in the paint like Stockton did.

Quote:

thats ok, i'd take 46% and 44%fg and a game 7 of the nba finals appearance over 59% and not participating in the playoffs due to winning only 36 games.

And I'll take Isiah's team over Barkley's team in a heartbeat.

Quote:

isiah thomas was that teams best player by a country mile. as you will know the teams best player will get alot of the praise that comes with winning, as well as a teams best player will get alot of the flak that comes with losing..and rightfully so. as nice it is to have defense and rebounding, that roster will be lucky if it scraped into the playoffs with no isiah thomas.

Detroit's teams were always known for their depth and talent, the '88 team wasn't as good as '89 and '90, but Isiah was one of the more fortunate players in the league when it comes to his supporting cast.

Quote:

they definately had depth. depth that would be swept in the first round if they were lucky if thomas hadn't been there.

Maybe, who knows? We both know that Isiah helped his team a lot, but I also know that his team was miles beyond what Charles was playing with. And even having a team that will make the playoffs without you is pretty damn good for a star.

Quote:

the pistons only won 4 more games during the regular season. beating the worlds greatest player isn't significant? the pistons made jordan seem human, a feat that no other team could achieve. meanwhile thomas averaged 20.4ppg, 4rpg, 10.4apg, and 2 steals and was the best and most valuable player of the series. the pistons average winning margin was 15 in the 4-1 demolition job.

The Bulls won 50 games because Jordan was basically a 1 man show with some help from Oakley. A cast of Oakley, Dave Corzine, Sam Vincent, John Paxson, Brad Sellers, and Pippen and Grant in their rookie years isn't too formidable

Quote:

the celtics had the best record in the east with 57 wins, and were coming off a finals appearance. thomas averaged 23ppg, 5.2rpg, 8.3apg, and 2.7spg as was the best and most valuable player of the series.

Again, Bird's 35% shooting and Boston's lack of a bench had a lot to do with it.

Quote:

fat was the best player on a team with the second best record in the west. denver did lead the league and pace and this was considered, but his play just could not go without recognition. denver's playoff record proves how much he meant to the team
without fat: 0-4 (the 4 games were lost by an average of 12 points)
with fat: 5-2
in the conference semifinals: nuggets up 2-1 before he went down, then proceded to lose the next 3 games

That's nice, but you can't always point to one player for a team's success. Particularly when this player is just not in the same tier as Barkley.

Quote:

if one of them won 54 games and played well in the playoffs and the other one only won thirty something i would definately say the loser has no case. winning games matters to me afterall.

Winning does matter, but not if the players are on completely different levels. All this tells me is that Charles wasn't playing on a good team, and Fat Lever was on a good team.

Quote:

yet he was his teams best player in the regular season and playoffs, and they won 54 games in the regular season, and had a 5-2 record with him in the playoffs

Alex English had a case, he was averaging 25 ppg for them.

Quote:

he was third after the regular season and second after the playoffs

You think Byron Scott was better than Worthy in the regular season?

Quote:

james worthy won finals mvp over that same top 10 player of all time, which alone makes him a better player than lovely.

Love's ranking seems to be in the correct range, but Barkley? Abour 8-9 spots too low.

Quote:

well jeff hornacek wasn't as good as charles barkley, i'll give you that... they just wanted to get rid of him at any cost, thats how much they hated him, so they took hornacek (who was gone a year later). but key contributers armon gilliam and johnny dawkins also had large drop offs in production. gilliam went from 17/8/2 to 12/6/2 and dawkins went from 12/3/7 to 9/2/5. with the team tanking they still manage to only win 9 less games than they did the previous year.

The players may have performed worse because they didn't have teams focusing their defense on Barkley every night.

Horace Grant? He was a solid power forward who defended well, rebounded well, was a great finisher and ran the floor very well, but he was more or less a guy who would score by being set up around the basket or hitting an open jumper. He wasn't a very good post player and couldn't really get his own offense. He was maybe one level above role player status.

Lewis was a very nice player, but not better than even an unmotivated Barkley. Same with Nance. Daugherty was great, but not there either. KJ was relatively close, and Stockton and Tim Hardaway probably weren't that far off, but that's still a stretch.

Larry Bird missed 37 games and could barely play in the playoffs. He has no case over Barkley in '92.

I'll give you Drexler, but only for that particular year.

Quote:

pippen was in his peak in 1991, better than any other year. who knows what kind of numbers he would've put up given a situation where he was the best player.

He wasn't even close to his peak. His peak was '94, would've probably been '96 if not for the injuries in the second half of the season.

He improved basically every aspect of his game after '91. His outside shot improved a lot, he became a smarter, even better defensive player, he became a better rebounder, he became a better facilitator who did an excellent job in the point forward role from '92 and beyond, and he added a post game later.

He was pretty close by '92. He was the team's primary facilitator by that point and doing an excellent job, his outside shot was much more consistent, and his overall play was more consistent.

Quote:

so 1 year is the result of being a much better offensive player?

That was the only year that Barkley had a contending team in his prime. They were starting to put together a nice team around him in Philly in '90, but that team quickly fell apart.

Quote:

if you consider top 35 in the all-time greats. and barkley's '86 was his second best season in the league.

Not even close. It wasn't even top 5. He was better every year from '87-'95 at least, might even say '96.

Quote:

who cares how many times he scored 30 points? that wasn't his role in the offense to take the most shots and score the most points. how many times did ben wallace score 30 points? oh he never did? must mean he was trash.

Nobody is comparing Wallace to Barkley. And Utah could've used more scoring from Stockton at times. See the 1st round loss to Phoenix in '90, the loss to Portland in '92, the loss to Seattle in '93, the elimination game vs Houston in '95, and the Seattle series in '96.

The point is that Stockton didn't show the ability to take over games like a true superstar and top 5 caliber player. The elite point guards who were also MVP-caliber plays did show that ability.

Quote:

yes so hawkins was not only much more dominant facing the chicago bulls in the playoffs, but all throughout the regular season too...this was the point you are trying to make isn't it?

Barkley is better.. Replace Malone with prime Barkley in those 97,98 stacked Jazz team and there's no doubt they will beat the bulls and won the championship.. Then replace Barkley with Prime Malone in 93 and they're lucky to even make it to wcf at worst 1st round exit..

Malone has a huge longevity edge.
Barkley was considerably worse as a defender.
Barkley's peak stats came in a higher pace era, advanced stats which elimate that factor suggests their peaks were identical. Without a superior peak (or statistical peak, and then add D in) there is little case for Barkley.
Barkley's conditioning was considered to be an issue, perhaps not throughout his career but certainly on entering the league, and at Phoenix (and Pippen's later shots at him suggest problems in the Houston years too). Barkley was also considered a negative influence on Oliver Miller (this from Rick Barry's Annual Scouting Handbooks "Basketball Bible"). Obviously Malone wasn't a picnic to get along with but his work ethic was legendary (for example http://sports.jrank.org/pages/2988/M...piration.html).
Despite excellent passing ability Barkley could be a ball stopper.

To some specific arguments I've seen here, why would you isolate 2 point% unless the argument is specifically about shooting 2s. Charles took dumb threes which hurt his teams. That's part of who he was.

It's not a huge gap (for example I don't see them trading places making much difference, though Sloan coaching Barkley could have been interesting) but for me it has to be Malone.

*Won`t Go Into The 2-Point FG% and PPG on 2-Point FGs: Charles Was SHAQ-LIKE:

Barkley Was a Better Post Player & Pure Scorer
Barkley Was a Better Mid Range Shooter
Barkley Was a Better Rebounder
Barkley Was a Better Passer
Barkley Was a Better Creator
Barkley Was a Better Stealer
Barkley Was a Better Shot Blocker
Barkley Was Doubled WAY MORE in His Prime
Barkley Was a Better Team Defender
Barkley Was a Better Ballhandler
Barkley Had More Skills
Barkley Was Clutcher
etc

Barkley Top 10 PER All Time (Season and Play-Offs)
Barkley Top 10 EFF All Time
Barkley Top 5 All Time in +/-
Barkley Top 4 All Time in Shot Made/Missed Diferential
Barkley 2nd To Magic as Higher ORT Per High Usage & Ball Possesion All Time
etc etc

I'm not saying that what Stockton did was easy, just that the pace helped those numbers.

ofcourse it is easier to put up more numbers in a high paced environment rather than a slow paced environment, this always is taken into consideration when ranking players

Quote:

The reason their offensive wasn't as effective as their FG% suggests is because they were average/mediocre in 3s and free throws, and only 3 teams turned the ball over more often.

Quote:

FG% doesn't factor in turnovers, 3s and free throws which are all relevant in putting up points. They made more free throws than any other team, were 7th in 3 pointers made, and while they were also a high turnover team, they didn't turn the ball over as much as Utah.

so the sixers were a better offensive team, so they should've won more games, but they ended up with a paltry 36 wins instead.

Quote:

Charles needed a team to make the playoffs, both Charles and Stockton impacted the game primarily at the offensive end, and Charles was on the better offensive team. The Sixers missed the playoffs because of defense, and while Barkley can make your interior defense weaker, I don't see them having that problem if they have Mark Eaton in the paint like Stockton did.

barkley would have been less effective on the offensive end with eaton clogging the paint and barkley would most likely get him traded because he was preventing him from scoring 25 points.

Quote:

And I'll take Isiah's team over Barkley's team in a heartbeat.

yeh. but barkley and his ego would not fit on that roster, so no point putting him there.

Quote:

Detroit's teams were always known for their depth and talent, the '88 team wasn't as good as '89 and '90, but Isiah was one of the more fortunate players in the league when it comes to his supporting cast.

excuses. how far a team goes will depend on their best player. championships matter, and people are judges by what they acheive. nobody cares about people who don't acheive, and excuses will not be made for why they did not acheive. you play the game to win.

Quote:

Maybe, who knows?

exactly. who knows. nobody knows, so they will be judged by what they achieved.

Quote:

We both know that Isiah helped his team a lot, but I also know that his team was miles beyond what Charles was playing with. And even having a team that will make the playoffs without you is pretty damn good for a star.

pretty damn good. which is why barkley was drafted to a team 1 season removed from a championship and he still didn't win. barkley then forced a trade to a team that made it to the conference semi finals and was expected to win it all..he didn't. he then forced another trade to a team 1 year removed from winning a championship and was expected to win it all..and you guessed it he still didn't. barkley was handed multiple rosters to win it all on a silver platter and he just could not get it done.

Quote:

The Bulls won 50 games because Jordan was basically a 1 man show with some help from Oakley. A cast of Oakley, Dave Corzine, Sam Vincent, John Paxson, Brad Sellers, and Pippen and Grant in their rookie years isn't too formidable

the pistons won only 4 more regular season games than the bulls, and they destroyed them 4-1 with the average winning margin of 15 points.

Quote:

Again, Bird's 35% shooting and Boston's lack of a bench had a lot to do with it.

the celtics still were heavily favoured and that supposed lack of bench did not restrict them in the regular season

Quote:

That's nice, but you can't always point to one player for a team's success. Particularly when this player is just not in the same tier as Barkley.

agreed, lever is on a higher tier than barkley

Quote:

Winning does matter, but not if the players are on completely different levels. All this tells me is that Charles wasn't playing on a good team, and Fat Lever was on a good team.

agreed, lever is on a much higher level to barkley. barkley would have clashed with alex english over who was taking the most shots every night, hence causing a trade and the nuggets languishing at the bottom of the league.

Quote:

Alex English had a case, he was averaging 25 ppg for them.

english has no case at all here. english was a nice scorer, a top 5 small forward, and not much else. lever was superb all-round, second team all-defense, and the second best shooting guard in the nba.

Quote:

You think Byron Scott was better than Worthy in the regular season?

yes, byron scott was the lakers second best player in the regular season.

Horace Grant? He was a solid power forward who defended well, rebounded well, was a great finisher and ran the floor very well, but he was more or less a guy who would score by being set up around the basket or hitting an open jumper. He wasn't a very good post player and couldn't really get his own offense. He was maybe one level above role player status.

this is peak horace grant. the bulls had 3 good players, and grant was one of them. he helped the bulls to 67 wins, a 15-7 record in the playoffs, and a championship. in limited opportunities on offense he averaged 14.2ppg, led the bulls with 10.0rpg, 2.7apg, 1.2spg, 1.6bpg, and only 1.2topg, all on 58%fg. grant knew his role and he executed it perfectly.

Quote:

Lewis was a very nice player, but not better than even an unmotivated Barkley. Same with Nance. Daugherty was great, but not there either. KJ was relatively close, and Stockton and Tim Hardaway probably weren't that far off, but that's still a stretch.

all these players won games and participated in the playoffs. players are rewarded for winning games.

Quote:

Larry Bird missed 37 games and could barely play in the playoffs. He has no case over Barkley in '92.

games missed does not come into play when ranking players in single seasons. despite it being his last season and him being 35 years old, bird's impact was still much greater than barkley's. the celtics went only 20-17 in those missed games anyway, and 31-14 with him.

Quote:

He wasn't even close to his peak. His peak was '94, would've probably been '96 if not for the injuries in the second half of the season.

He improved basically every aspect of his game after '91. His outside shot improved a lot, he became a smarter, even better defensive player, he became a better rebounder, he became a better facilitator who did an excellent job in the point forward role from '92 and beyond, and he added a post game later.

he improved on offense so much huh? howcome he never shot the ball better?
howcome he never played better in the playoffs? 21.6ppg, 8.9rpg, 5.8apg, 2.5spg, 1.1bpg
howcome he never played better in the finals? 20.8ppg, 9.4rpg, 6.6apg, 2.4spg, 1.0bpg, including a monster close out game 5 in which he recorded 32points, 13rebounds, 7assists, and 5steals, all while guarding magic johnson at the other end for most of the finals.

Quote:

He was pretty close by '92. He was the team's primary facilitator by that point and doing an excellent job, his outside shot was much more consistent, and his overall play was more consistent.

yeh he was close to his '91 self in '92, but his play in the '91 playoffs separates the two seasons.

Quote:

That was the only year that Barkley had a contending team in his prime. They were starting to put together a nice team around him in Philly in '90, but that team quickly fell apart.

robinson never had a contending team in his prime..infact he had the worst supporting cast of any of the top 10 players in the league every season.

Quote:

Not even close. It wasn't even top 5. He was better every year from '87-'95 at least, might even say '96.

Quote:

Nobody is comparing Wallace to Barkley

you are comparing a primary scorer on a team to a primary playmaker on a team

Quote:

And Utah could've used more scoring from Stockton at times. See the 1st round loss to Phoenix in '90, the loss to Portland in '92, the loss to Seattle in '93, the elimination game vs Houston in '95, and the Seattle series in '96.

i could say the same about barkley, except barkley was the primary scorer on these teams so it was more important for him to score the ball than it was stockton.
1987 - loses in the first round, cheeks steps up more than barkley, as do erving and hinson. in the series deciding game 5 barkley ends up with another paltry game: 12 points, 13 rebounds, 1 assist, 0 steals, 0 blocks, 4 turnovers, 5-16fg
1988 - does not make the playoffs, should have contributed more.
1989 - swept in the first round. gets outplayed by cheeks.
1990 - again doesn't step up the most. hawkins and dawkins both step up more in the po's, only 17 points in the elimination game.
1992 - did not make the playoffs, should have contributed more.
1995 - kj and green step up more, suns lose a 3-1 lead to the rockets. barkley shoots 7-16 and is outscored by danny ainge in game 7. kj goes for 46 and 10 assists.
1997 - shoots 43% in the playoffs. again does not step up while others around him are.

Quote:

The point is that Stockton didn't show the ability to take over games like a true superstar and top 5 caliber player. The elite point guards who were also MVP-caliber plays did show that ability.

you have no point here

Quote:

Hawkins was definitely not better throughout the regular season.

he was still better, it was alot closer in the regular season..but hawkins tore up the playoffs and as a result was easily better overall. dumars was top 4 shooting guard tho.